JinxofSpades:Bloody William:Plus what is undoubtedly a 500% markup because the administration probably doesn't know any sort of commercial technology from its own asshole. Just a hunch. How big is the district that it needs half a million for door scanners and cards?

Doesn't really strike me as unreasonable. The cards and readers, sure. But remember how many read choke points they are probably using- that's a lot of readers, especially if they are tracking direction of movement. Plus the software to drive the thing, the calibration, installation, etc. $500k is probably right for a decent sized school system.

Maybe. I keep thinking "I could cobble that together with $500 and stuff from dealextreme.com." Which, by the way, is awesome if you want weird Chinese electronics of dubious quality and legality.

Who knows? I imagine they also secure their buildings with card readers, libraries, cafeteria, etc.They should have called the program something different and only the craziest religious zealots that think wearing an ID is the sign of the devil would have complained. Wait, what?Link

It's more than Fark, it's InfoWars.

again - you aren't justifying the associated costs very well. education budgets are already tight. why implement an expensive security system with well known flaws when there are cheaper (and less dehumanizing) alternatives?

Maybe. I keep thinking "I could cobble that together with $500 and stuff from dealextreme.com." Which, by the way, is awesome if you want weird Chinese electronics of dubious quality and legality.

I know that feeling. :)It actually makes me feel better to see a realistic budget on something like this. If the district spent $10k on a system like that, I can guarantee their accuracy would be shiat, and the project would be a failure.

Who knows? I imagine they also secure their buildings with card readers, libraries, cafeteria, etc.They should have called the program something different and only the craziest religious zealots that think wearing an ID is the sign of the devil would have complained. Wait, what?Link

It's more than Fark, it's InfoWars.

again - you aren't justifying the associated costs very well. education budgets are already tight. why implement an expensive security system with well known flaws when there are cheaper (and less dehumanizing) alternatives?

Do you know how many decent computer labs you could make with that money? Hell, if the district has 2,000 students, that's enough to give everyone their own Chromebook.

Bhruic:dittybopper: You aren't required by law to attend work. If you have a problem with wearing an RFID, you can either work somewhere else, or just not work. School isn't like that. Schooling is *MANDATORY*, and very few people have the time and resources to home school their kids.

Homeschooling is legal in all 50 states. Therefore going to school is not mandatory.

OK, don't school your kids. Meaning, don't send them to school, and don't home school them. Going to school is mandatory.

Homeschooling is a very narrow exception to the rule that you have to send your kids to either a government run or equivalent private school, and a narrow exception that very few can actually do. My sister-in-law homeschooled her daughter and son for a few years, and it was a caste-iron biatch. She was a stay-at-home mom so she had the time, but it was so difficult that they eventually gave up and sent the kids to a private school instead. When they did enter school they were initially bored because they were advanced compared to their privately-schooled peers, though.

As a very narrow exception, it's not one that the vast majority of people could take advantage of. That's like requiring going through a metal detector before you fly, take a train, bus, or drive your own car. Sure, you could walk, ride a bike, or take a motorcycle, but that's not an option for the vast majority, and I'm sure no one would seriously argue that you "have options" in that case.

dittybopper:wingnut396: Whatever. Know what happens if I refuse to wear my RFID badge at work?

You aren't required by law to attend work. If you have a problem with wearing an RFID, you can either work somewhere else, or just not work. School isn't like that. Schooling is *MANDATORY*, and very few people have the time and resources to home school their kids.

So? Not everyone has the resources to go into business for themselves at the same rate they may earn at a place the requires them to wear a badge? Many States also now have RFID chips in the driver's licenses. Of course you are not REQUIRED to get one, but good luck moving around today's society with one.

Again, the root problem is not RFID. You complain that RFID is not very secure, which is mostly true. But I have feeling that if a 'magic' full secure analog to RFID was made, you would not be in support of it. I also take issue with the people worried that their kids will be tracked 'everywhere' with theses school IDs. That is a gross misunderstanding of how the technology works and conflating it with some biblical nonsense does no one any favors.

The root problem seems to be compliance with constant identification. I have sympathy for this issue and see that having to prove who you are and why you think you have the right to be somewhere is not always a good thing.

dittybopper:JinxofSpades: She should also be concerned about walking around on campus, anyway. Those cards are probably using 13.56MHz RFID, and will require the students to be constantly bombarded with high frequency waves

They are already bombarded with 14.000 to 14.350 MHz waves, pretty much continuously. In fact, I'm bombarding people near me with 14.027 MHz waves right now, with an EIRP of about 250 watts.

CQ CQ CQ DE N2-SOMETHING-SOMETHING-SOMETHING

14.00 to 14.350, sure. But 13.56MHz, known in some circles as the "cancer frequency"...that's like a whole nother wave.

Who knows? I imagine they also secure their buildings with card readers, libraries, cafeteria, etc.They should have called the program something different and only the craziest religious zealots that think wearing an ID is the sign of the devil would have complained. Wait, what?Link

It's more than Fark, it's InfoWars.

again - you aren't justifying the associated costs very well. education budgets are already tight. why implement an expensive security system with well known flaws when there are cheaper (and less dehumanizing) alternatives?

It's my job to justify the costs to you?Listen, in my Boobies I stated that I understand the refusal to wear an RFID card by this student even if it was for the wrong reasons. You came in and went over the top with accusations of total mind control:we shelve and warehouse 'em like they're boxes. how are kids supposed to learn to be fully functional adults in a 'free society' when they spend their formative years being suppressed,I came back and said, well, it's not really that crazy since RFID can be used just like an attendance list only more efficient and probably less error prone.Now you want me to give you an ROI on this project?

dittybopper:You are required to attend school by law, and if the school you must attend requires that you to enter a metal detector as a condition for attending, then that is a violation

How do you feel about metal detectors in courthouses? People aren't going there voluntarily, whether they're there in police custody or just attending jury duty; but I think there's enough history of witnesses, judges, jurors being gunned down on courthouse steps (well, it happens all the time on TV anyhow) to say that maybe your 2nd and 4th amendments should be bent a little in that particular location.

wingnut396:But the point about tracking and inventorying children has little to do with RFID itself. This has been done for years already.

The difference is that before technological solutions like RFID, it was imperfect, spotty, and relatively easy to circumvent by any kid with an independent streak and a modicum of intelligence.

Thinking on it now, though, I can come up with a few low-tech ways to circumvent RFID. I'm betting I could even shake their faith in the system: By showing up where I am supposed to show up, but without the RFID sensors noting my passage. I could to that with a pennies worth of aluminum foil. I could even make it relatively unnoticeable by photographing the front of the badge and printing that image, and gluing that to the foil.

"Hey, I was in class. Check with my teachers. Not my fault your ID badges and readers suck".

WTF? Why do school kids need to wear security badges? Is it so that some can have access to the reactor controls or keys to the nuclear arsenal? Those are the only people who should be wearing security badges.

dittybopper:wingnut396: But the point about tracking and inventorying children has little to do with RFID itself. This has been done for years already.

The difference is that before technological solutions like RFID, it was imperfect, spotty, and relatively easy to circumvent by any kid with an independent streak and a modicum of intelligence.

Thinking on it now, though, I can come up with a few low-tech ways to circumvent RFID. I'm betting I could even shake their faith in the system: By showing up where I am supposed to show up, but without the RFID sensors noting my passage. I could to that with a pennies worth of aluminum foil. I could even make it relatively unnoticeable by photographing the front of the badge and printing that image, and gluing that to the foil.

"Hey, I was in class. Check with my teachers. Not my fault your ID badges and readers suck".

I'm pretty lax in my attitude towards security measures because I realize that any security measure can be compromised quickly, cheaply, or easily (pick two) by anyone with enough knowledge and dedication.

serial_crusher:dittybopper: You are required to attend school by law, and if the school you must attend requires that you to enter a metal detector as a condition for attending, then that is a violation

How do you feel about metal detectors in courthouses? People aren't going there voluntarily, whether they're there in police custody or just attending jury duty; but I think there's enough history of witnesses, judges, jurors being gunned down on courthouse steps (well, it happens all the time on TV anyhow) to say that maybe your 2nd and 4th amendments should be bent a little in that particular location.

With the exception of those who are under criminal indictment, which does temporarily suspend some of their rights, entrance into a court is strictly voluntary.

I know, because as a foster parent I attend court on a semi-regular basis. I've no problem going through the metal detector there, because it's voluntary for me and for all the employees and other witnesses, and it's a very narrow exception that is tailored to address a very specific governmental function.

serial_crusher:I think there's enough history of witnesses, judges, jurors being gunned down on courthouse steps (well, it happens all the time on TV anyhow)

Metal detectors won't prevent anyone from gunning people down on the courthouse steps, since that is still outside. In fact, the easiest place to shoot people would be as they are waiting in line for the metal detector.

Seriously, though, Colorado had a spate of men shooting their wives' divorce lawyers inside courtrooms back in the eighties. Apparently you could walk into a courtroom "carrying" back then.

dittybopper:wingnut396: But the point about tracking and inventorying children has little to do with RFID itself. This has been done for years already.

The difference is that before technological solutions like RFID, it was imperfect, spotty, and relatively easy to circumvent by any kid with an independent streak and a modicum of intelligence.

Thinking on it now, though, I can come up with a few low-tech ways to circumvent RFID. I'm betting I could even shake their faith in the system: By showing up where I am supposed to show up, but without the RFID sensors noting my passage. I could to that with a pennies worth of aluminum foil. I could even make it relatively unnoticeable by photographing the front of the badge and printing that image, and gluing that to the foil.

"Hey, I was in class. Check with my teachers. Not my fault your ID badges and readers suck".

dittybopper:serial_crusher: dittybopper: You are required to attend school by law, and if the school you must attend requires that you to enter a metal detector as a condition for attending, then that is a violation

How do you feel about metal detectors in courthouses? People aren't going there voluntarily, whether they're there in police custody or just attending jury duty; but I think there's enough history of witnesses, judges, jurors being gunned down on courthouse steps (well, it happens all the time on TV anyhow) to say that maybe your 2nd and 4th amendments should be bent a little in that particular location.

With the exception of those who are under criminal indictment, which does temporarily suspend some of their rights, entrance into a court is strictly voluntary.

I know, because as a foster parent I attend court on a semi-regular basis. I've no problem going through the metal detector there, because it's voluntary for me and for all the employees and other witnesses, and it's a very narrow exception that is tailored to address a very specific governmental function.

Or jury duty, or subpoena, or court order, or i'm sure some internet lawyers could produce other examples when you are not under criminal indictment when you are order to appear in court.

This allows the school to track the student's location after leaving campus and for as long as the badge is on the student's person.

Jesus f*cking Christ, RFID DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY.

Look, if an institution wants you to wear RFID to track your location on premise, there's just not an issue. How is it any worse than taking attendance or checking in? They're not tracking you out in public.

dittybopper:wingnut396: But the point about tracking and inventorying children has little to do with RFID itself. This has been done for years already.

The difference is that before technological solutions like RFID, it was imperfect, spotty, and relatively easy to circumvent by any kid with an independent streak and a modicum of intelligence.

Thinking on it now, though, I can come up with a few low-tech ways to circumvent RFID. I'm betting I could even shake their faith in the system: By showing up where I am supposed to show up, but without the RFID sensors noting my passage. I could to that with a pennies worth of aluminum foil. I could even make it relatively unnoticeable by photographing the front of the badge and printing that image, and gluing that to the foil.

"Hey, I was in class. Check with my teachers. Not my fault your ID badges and readers suck".

So treating the kids like inventory is okay as long as you do it poorly and inefficiently?

wingnut396:dittybopper: wingnut396: Whatever. Know what happens if I refuse to wear my RFID badge at work?

You aren't required by law to attend work. If you have a problem with wearing an RFID, you can either work somewhere else, or just not work. School isn't like that. Schooling is *MANDATORY*, and very few people have the time and resources to home school their kids.

So? Not everyone has the resources to go into business for themselves at the same rate they may earn at a place the requires them to wear a badge?

You have a constitutional right to make $X dollars? A badge requirement as a condition for employment at a specific place of work isn't an infringement because you can always quit that employer. You can't always quit school.Many States also now have RFID chips in the driver's licenses. Of course you are not REQUIRED to get one, but good luck moving around today's society with one.

That's only the "Enhanced Drivers License" version, which is an option for border crossings into Mexico or Canada without having a passport (Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative). I live in such a state that issues EDLs, and only the enhanced ones have the RFID chip. You don't have to get one. In fact, you have to provide more documentation and pay more money to get one. I don't have one.Again, the root problem is not RFID. You complain that RFID is not very secure, which is mostly true. But I have feeling that if a 'magic' full secure analog to RFID was made, you would not be in support of it. I also take issue with the people worried that their kids will be tracked 'everywhere' with theses school IDs. That is a gross misunderstanding of how the technology works and conflating it with some biblical nonsense does no one any favors.

That is not my complaint. You must have me confused with someone else.The root problem seems to be compliance with constant identification. I have sympathy for this issue and see that having to prove who you are and why you think you have the right to be somewhere is not always a good thing.

*THAT* is my complaint, at least as it pertains to school kids.

I've worked for employers that required RFID badges for access, probably before most of you knew what RFID was: When I worked in a SCIF back in the 1980's, you couldn't enter the classified portion of the facility without your badge. If you forgot it, you needed to have a superior verify who you were, and you had to be checked against a list of people permitted access.

Hell, even today, in order to get into the network operations center at my current employer I need to use a coded key fob and enter an individualized PIN just to unlock the door. That's a condition of my employment. I accept it, because it makes sense (access to the NOC should be limited) and because if I were to find it onerous, I can look for work elsewhere.

When I have a problem is when you are training young, impressionable students that people in authority tracking their movements is just a normal part of their everyday lives, and that they can be required to submit or face dire consequences. I submit that kids used to that sort of thing will be less likely to protest against such tracking as adults.

pciszek:dittybopper: I could to that with a pennies worth of aluminum foil.

You sure? I tried wrapping a cell phone in aluminum foil as a demo of the fact that "there is no electrical field inside a conductor", but it still rang when called.

I've done that very experiment. Phone didn't ring, and in fact I got a message saying the "person was unavailable", just like if they had been out of the service area.

Of course, being an RF guy, I made sure the phone was completely wrapped, with no gaps. Radio waves don't penetrate metal, they are reflected by it. If they weren't, then RADAR wouldn't work, and neither would antennas that rely on reflection of RF to increase gain (like those ubiquitous DISH Network antennas)

dittybopper:I've worked for employers that required RFID badges for access, probably before most of you knew what RFID was: When I worked in a SCIF back in the 1980's, you couldn't enter the classified portion of the facility without your badge.

I should point out that you had to wave your badge over a reader, and if you were allowed access, a green light would come on. If you had your access pulled, or the reader couldn't read your badge properly, it would light up red, and the MPs wouldn't let you pass.

wingnut396:dittybopper: serial_crusher: dittybopper: You are required to attend school by law, and if the school you must attend requires that you to enter a metal detector as a condition for attending, then that is a violation

How do you feel about metal detectors in courthouses? People aren't going there voluntarily, whether they're there in police custody or just attending jury duty; but I think there's enough history of witnesses, judges, jurors being gunned down on courthouse steps (well, it happens all the time on TV anyhow) to say that maybe your 2nd and 4th amendments should be bent a little in that particular location.

With the exception of those who are under criminal indictment, which does temporarily suspend some of their rights, entrance into a court is strictly voluntary.

I know, because as a foster parent I attend court on a semi-regular basis. I've no problem going through the metal detector there, because it's voluntary for me and for all the employees and other witnesses, and it's a very narrow exception that is tailored to address a very specific governmental function.

Or jury duty, or subpoena, or court order, or i'm sure some internet lawyers could produce other examples when you are not under criminal indictment when you are order to appear in court.

Yeah, that's what I was getting at. Really the important question here is whether or not I can use the metal detector as an excuse to get out of jury duty.Getting me an answer before next Tuesday would be preferable...

wingnut396:dittybopper: wingnut396: But the point about tracking and inventorying children has little to do with RFID itself. This has been done for years already.

The difference is that before technological solutions like RFID, it was imperfect, spotty, and relatively easy to circumvent by any kid with an independent streak and a modicum of intelligence.

Thinking on it now, though, I can come up with a few low-tech ways to circumvent RFID. I'm betting I could even shake their faith in the system: By showing up where I am supposed to show up, but without the RFID sensors noting my passage. I could to that with a pennies worth of aluminum foil. I could even make it relatively unnoticeable by photographing the front of the badge and printing that image, and gluing that to the foil.

"Hey, I was in class. Check with my teachers. Not my fault your ID badges and readers suck".

So treating the kids like inventory is okay as long as you do it poorly and inefficiently?

No.

Having teachers take attendance is fundamentally different from tracking student movement via RFID.

dittybopper:wingnut396: But the point about tracking and inventorying children has little to do with RFID itself. This has been done for years already.

The difference is that before technological solutions like RFID, it was imperfect, spotty, and relatively easy to circumvent by any kid with an independent streak and a modicum of intelligence.

Thinking on it now, though, I can come up with a few low-tech ways to circumvent RFID. I'm betting I could even shake their faith in the system: By showing up where I am supposed to show up, but without the RFID sensors noting my passage. I could to that with a pennies worth of aluminum foil. I could even make it relatively unnoticeable by photographing the front of the badge and printing that image, and gluing that to the foil.

"Hey, I was in class. Check with my teachers. Not my fault your ID badges and readers suck".

Or you could just stick your badge in another kid's backpack? Make sure it's one who has the same schedule as you for the periods you're gone (and same gender in case of bathroom breaks), and you're set.

KellyX:I didn't get to read all the comments, and I'm sure this was covered...

I'm not sure how they'd be tracked off-campus, but the fact they claim that would be reason to not want to keep these on my person outside of school.

In-School however, I see now issue with these being used. Perhaps they should make them be stored at their first class of the day and dropped off there at the end of the day too?

1. RFID tech has a very limited range. The chips are passive and transmit nothing until they enter an RF field of correct frequency, they then us that RF field power themselves, and emit a very weak signal that is nothing more then a short string of numbers that has to be read by a data base to even know what that particular string corresponds to.

2. Even if they walk near another RFID scanner like say at a walmart, all it reads is a string of numbers, which mean NOTHING to that RFID scanner and Database that its attached too, in fact it will more then likely come up as a bag of CHIPS to the stores scanner.

dittybopper:When I have a problem is when you are training young, impressionable students that people in authority tracking their movements is just a normal part of their everyday lives, and that they can be required to submit or face dire consequences. I submit that kids used to that sort of thing will be less likely to protest against such tracking as adults.

I don't like this either, but frankly, we don't know if this is actually happening.

If the badges are just perimeter access, I really don't have a problem with this.

The article claims:

"new pilot program which tracks the precise location of all attending 4,200 students at Anson Jones Middle School and John Jay High School"

which *could* be possible.

But they also claim:

"This allows the school to track the student's location after leaving campus and for as long as the badge is on the student's person."

which is bullshiat.

So again, I'm not really seeing this as a problem of teaching kids that all their movement are being tracked. It depends on how this system is setup and the article is woefully inaccurate on how RFI D works, so I hesitate to give them full faith in their scare mongering.

Having teachers take attendance is fundamentally different from tracking student movement via RFID.

How so? Data collection is data collection.

Do teachers formally record data on who passes by certain areas at all times? No? RFID does.

Saying "data collection is data collection" is pretty stupid. That's like saying "motor vehicles are motor vehicles", which is true, but it places electric RAZOR scooters in the same category as the Knock Nevis or the Saturn V.

Automated data collection is significantly more capable than manual data collection, or we'd still be using manual methods. It's intuitively obvious to the most casual observer.

Raharu:KellyX: I didn't get to read all the comments, and I'm sure this was covered...

I'm not sure how they'd be tracked off-campus, but the fact they claim that would be reason to not want to keep these on my person outside of school.

In-School however, I see now issue with these being used. Perhaps they should make them be stored at their first class of the day and dropped off there at the end of the day too?

1. RFID tech has a very limited range. The chips are passive and transmit nothing until they enter an RF field of correct frequency, they then us that RF field power themselves, and emit a very weak signal that is nothing more then a short string of numbers that has to be read by a data base to even know what that particular string corresponds to.

2. Even if they walk near another RFID scanner like say at a walmart, all it reads is a string of numbers, which mean NOTHING to that RFID scanner and Database that its attached too, in fact it will more then likely come up as a bag of CHIPS to the stores scanner.

Sorry if there was a mistaken, I do understand how RFID works, I just was offering solutions to paranoid students/parents.

I also don't like how they said it was to track off campus, agree to their terms and who knows, they might upgrade the badge to GPS and not say anything, or might be crazy totalitarian republicans and start installing RFID readers all over town ;)~

Raharu:KellyX: I didn't get to read all the comments, and I'm sure this was covered...

I'm not sure how they'd be tracked off-campus, but the fact they claim that would be reason to not want to keep these on my person outside of school.

In-School however, I see now issue with these being used. Perhaps they should make them be stored at their first class of the day and dropped off there at the end of the day too?

1. RFID tech has a very limited range. The chips are passive and transmit nothing until they enter an RF field of correct frequency, they then us that RF field power themselves, and emit a very weak signal that is nothing more then a short string of numbers that has to be read by a data base to even know what that particular string corresponds to.

2. Even if they walk near another RFID scanner like say at a walmart, all it reads is a string of numbers, which mean NOTHING to that RFID scanner and Database that its attached too, in fact it will more then likely come up as a bag of CHIPS to the stores scanner.

You know, I could build a simple jammer that I could place in my kid's backpack every day. Put out a very weak Part 15 compliant RF signal on the output frequency of the RFID badges, and it would swamp the RFID receivers nearby.

Besides the whole claim of tracking off campus, I really don't see the issue. This is just leading to the eventual outcome of having embedded chips or star trekish like communicator on your person at any given time.

KellyX:Besides the whole claim of tracking off campus, I really don't see the issue. This is just leading to the eventual outcome of having embedded chips or star trekish like communicator on your person at any given time.

dittybopper:Raharu: KellyX: I didn't get to read all the comments, and I'm sure this was covered...

I'm not sure how they'd be tracked off-campus, but the fact they claim that would be reason to not want to keep these on my person outside of school.

In-School however, I see now issue with these being used. Perhaps they should make them be stored at their first class of the day and dropped off there at the end of the day too?

1. RFID tech has a very limited range. The chips are passive and transmit nothing until they enter an RF field of correct frequency, they then us that RF field power themselves, and emit a very weak signal that is nothing more then a short string of numbers that has to be read by a data base to even know what that particular string corresponds to.

2. Even if they walk near another RFID scanner like say at a walmart, all it reads is a string of numbers, which mean NOTHING to that RFID scanner and Database that its attached too, in fact it will more then likely come up as a bag of CHIPS to the stores scanner.

You know, I could build a simple jammer that I could place in my kid's backpack every day. Put out a very weak Part 15 compliant RF signal on the output frequency of the RFID badges, and it would swamp the RFID receivers nearby.

That's kind of the paranoid asshole thing to do. Do you object to the teachers taking attendance?

Do you object to the office calling down to the class room to see if your kid is there because you need to take him to the dentist?

RFID makes the above simpler, and quicker. Same for the points below.

Do you object to the school and the police/EMS knowing if your kid is off campus if there is a shooting or other emergency like a fire?

Having teachers take attendance is fundamentally different from tracking student movement via RFID.

How so? Data collection is data collection.

Do teachers formally record data on who passes by certain areas at all times? No? RFID does.

Saying "data collection is data collection" is pretty stupid. That's like saying "motor vehicles are motor vehicles", which is true, but it places electric RAZOR scooters in the same category as the Knock Nevis or the Saturn V.

Automated data collection is significantly more capable than manual data collection, or we'd still be using manual methods. It's intuitively obvious to the most casual observer.

Fine, I over-simplified. Automated data collection is more capable. And more efficient.So is the concern here the method of collection, or the ways that the data is being used? Because I would point out that keeping a record of every read incident of a student (or all of their movements through a building) is hardly an invasion of privacy. Could the data be misused? I suppose so. But unless admin are running reports on the number of times someone enters a bathroom (which they'd be unlikely to track anyway) I'm hard pressed to imagine an abuse of the provided data.

scottydoesntknow:Refusing to wear a RFID-chipped badge? Ok we'll be reasonable, will you wear a badge that doesn't have one? That's an expulsion

FTFY subby.

/Stupid idea nonetheless//Let the helicopter parents track their own kids

Except for the part where it said she did not want to wear one at all due to the fact that it would imply that she is participating in the program, hence the unreasonableness.

dittybopper:Raharu: DoBeDoBeDo: serial_crusher: Also, from the standpoint of preventing weapons from entering school, it's at best a very, very weak solution. I taught the 12 year old kid up the street how to knap glass into an effective blade/projectile point, and that won't show up in a metal detector. Neither would a carefully constructed zip gun.